U.N. leader: Sandy a lesson in climate change

“United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon says one of the lessons from Superstorm Sandy is the need for global action to deal with future climate shocks.

A new round of global climate talks starts in Doha, Qatar on Nov. 27, and Ban urged nations to reach a binding agreement by 2015 to curtail emissions of heat-trapping gases in order to stop the planet from overheating.

He told the U.N. General Assembly on Friday that it is difficult to attribute any single storm to climate change, but the world already knows that “extreme weather due to climate change is the new normal.”

…

“There has been a series of extreme weather incidents. That is not a political statement. That is a factual statement,” Cuomo said. “Anyone who says there’s not a dramatic change in weather patterns, I think, is denying reality.”
Read More

Recent historically low global tropical cyclone activity
Tropical cyclone accumulated cyclone energy (ACE) has exhibited strikingly large global interannual variability during the past 40-years. In the pentad since 2006, Northern Hemisphere and global tropical cyclone ACE has decreased dramatically to the lowest levels since the late 1970s. Additionally, the global frequency of tropical cyclones has reached a historical low.
Key Points
• In the past 5-years, global tropical cyclone activity has decreased markedly
• Tropical cyclone ACE is modulated by ENSO and PDO on a global scale
• Heightened North Atlantic hurricane activity is not unexpected

Timothy Wirth, U.S. Undersecretary of State for Global Issues, seconded Strong’s statement: “We have got to ride the global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic policy and environmental policy.”

“No matter if the science of global warming is all phony … climate change provides the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world.” – Christine Stewart, former Canadian Minister of the Environment

“The models are convenient fictions that provide something very useful.”Dr David Frame, Climate modeler, Oxford University

“It doesn’t matter what is true, it only matters what people believe is true.” – Paul Watson, Co-founder of Greenpeace”

“Unless we announce disasters no one will listen.” – Sir John Houghton, First chairman of the IPCC

“The data doesn’t matter. We’re not basing our recommendations on the data. We’re basing them on the climate models.” Prof. Chris Folland, Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research

Quote:
“After some prolonged deliberation, I have decided to withdraw from participating in the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). I am withdrawing because I have come to view the part of the IPCC to which my expertise is relevant as having become politicized. In addition, when I have raised my concerns to the IPCC leadership, their response was simply to dismiss my concerns…. …..Shortly after Dr. Trenberth requested that I draft the Atlantic hurricane section for the AR4’s Observations chapter, Dr. Trenberth participated in a press conference organized by scientists at Harvard on the topic “Experts to warn global warming likely to continue spurring more outbreaks of intense hurricane activity” along with other media interviews on the topic. The result of this media interaction was widespread coverage that directly connected the very busy 2004 Atlantic hurricane season as being caused by anthropogenic greenhouse gas warming occurring today. Listening to and reading transcripts of this press conference and media interviews, it is apparent that Dr. Trenberth was being accurately quoted and summarized in such statements and was not being misrepresented in the media. These media sessions have potential to result in a widespread perception that global warming has made recent hurricane activity much more severe.

Moreover, the evidence is quite strong and supported by the most recent credible studies that any impact in the future from global warming upon hurricane will likely be quite small. The latest results from the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory (Knutson and Tuleya, Journal of Climate, 2004) suggest that by around 2080, hurricanes may have winds and rainfall about 5% more intense than today. It has been proposed that even this tiny change may be an exaggeration as to what may happen by the end of the 21st Century (Michaels, Knappenberger, and Landsea, Journal of Climate, 2005, submitted).

It is beyond me why my colleagues would utilize the media to push an unsupported agenda that recent hurricane activity has been due to global warming. Given Dr. Trenberth’s role as the IPCC’s Lead Author responsible for preparing the text on hurricanes, his public statements so far outside of current scientific understanding led me to concern that it would be very difficult for the IPCC process to proceed objectively with regards to the assessment on hurricane activity.”

This just shows how far behind the times the UN actually is! The rest of the world is starting to realise that mankind has been subjected to the biggest con trick ever, but not the UN. They have not managed to sort out Iran, Syria or any of the other trouble spots of the world, but they are now going after something fictitious! Past Sell By Date is the expression that springs to mind!

2013 will be the “international year of climate alarmism”. It is clear. Pressure on Obama to try again the Cap And Trade, Hollywood and Matt Damon, climate radicals renewed, new IPCC report, Kioto II etc etc. Well, well. The carbon market need you!

“But the most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly and with unflagging attention. It must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over. Here, as so often in this world, persistence is the first and most important requirement for success. “

“The world already knows that extreme weather due to climate change is the new normal”
—————————————————————————————————————–

Yes, everyone in the world does seem to know this and repeats it like a parrot. BUT, this is not what the Science says!
In its Special Report on Extreme Weather (2012)http://www.ipcc-wg2.gov/SREX/
the Inter Govermental Panel on Climate Change says :
“There is medium evidence and high agreement that long-term trends in normalized losses have not been attributed to natural or anthropogenic climate change”
“The statement about the absence of trends in impacts attributable to natural or anthropogenic climate change holds for tropical and extratropical storms and tornados”
“The absence of an attributable climate change signal in losses also holds for flood losses”

So why do people keep saying that any event of extreme weather is due to climate change – and then claiming that the ‘settled science’ supports this view – when quite clearly it says the opposite?

Look, all the technocrats know that the only source of future funding for their political projects is energy and unlike taxing enterprise and business they can, by manipulating the science, look holier than thou doing it. So far nature in its current warm cycle has played along. Now if they can reduce CO2 just as we hit a cooler cycle, which is coming, then they will be able to say, “see we were right!” We have to carry on the fight to get the real science out there and to delay energy taxes so that it does cool before CO2 starts falling. We, the skeptics, are winning, and they know it, hence the panic to get these taxes etc on the back of any weather event of note…

History has taught us time and time again, that some of the most destructive events in mankind’s past are driven by brainwashed ideologues such as the hapless individuals, Obama, Ki-moon and others.

A half percent reduction in TSI, combined with larger reductions in EUV, Solar and Terrestrial magnetic fields, may shortly (2014, Abdussamatov) bring such obvious cooling that eventually even the blinkered fools that bring climate advice to Obama and Ki-moon may start to bring them different advice.

Given that the PDO has turned negative, the AMO will go negative in a few years, sunspots have plateaued at an unusually low level and will start a (long drawn out ?) decline in a couple of years, then Northern hemisphere / global cooling is the only possible outcome.

Ultimately the political fool leaders shielded from a balanced range of advice will prove to be largely ineffectual, though it is likely that the economy of primarily the USA will take a hit, not helped by the growing national debt.

Interestingly, the US economy is on course for a possible total collapse sometime between 2030 and 2040. Obama and the EPA will likely hasten the arrival of that event. Do a search for Laffer on Cheifio’s blog if you are interested in reading more about that pending disaster or just keep on doing an Ostrich impersonation and keep your heads in the sand.

Which report after the IPCC AR4 which stated
“Most of the observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic GHG concentrations.” changed “most likely “to a definite need for action?

Cuomo says- We have had a series of extreme weather events.
So?
We always have extreme weather events at some time. This has happened since the earth cooled. The facts that storm frequency has declined, we are still hearing rubbish about weather. We live on a dynamic planet, get used to it.
Question– do holders of UN Secretary General’s office now have their brains removed on appointment? Despite real climate scientists stating that Sandy is not a climate change phenomenon Ban Ki Moon insists it is.

Yes. He is absolutely correct! This is a lesson in climate change. The climate is changing dramatically. We should all pay attention. It is getting colder. Long term changes in climate are evident at the poles. If the poles get cooler the temperature differential between equator and poles increases and winds will increase resulting in more storms. Conversely, warming poles, less heat differential, less wind, less storms. Climate 101.

provided people find ways to prevent their retirement funds being co-opted by the carbon cowboys, the CAGW scam will never get off the ground:

9 Nov: Lynn Doan: Bloomberg: California Carbon ‘Crippled’ by Buyer Hesitation: Energy Markets
California carbon is trading at a record low as legal threats, political opposition and rule changes plague the days leading up to the first auction of permits under the state’s greenhouse-gas program…
State regulators agreed to spend 18 months reviewing and not enforcing the ban, which prohibits companies from bringing low-emission electricity into California while sending more carbon-intensive power to other states…
Amid the criticism, power utilities such as Pacific Gas & Electric and Edison International (EIX)’s Southern California Edison have continued to uphold the cap-and-trade program as the best option the state has to cut emissions.
“We’ve been supportive of a cap-and-trade structure to achieve greenhouse-gas emission goals all along, and we’re still there,” Gary Stern, Edison’s director of market strategy and resource planning in Rosemead, California, said by telephone Nov. 7. “The market structure is a lower-cost means of achieving the goals than other command and control approaches might be.”…http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-11-09/california-carbon-crippled-by-buyer-hesitation-energy-markets.html

Typo, “Most likely” should be “very likely”.
But still, how “very likely?” Not 100% so the remaining % is doubt. And now they claim that Sandy is the new norm on a “very likely” (whatever %). This is hardly a mandate that would stand up in court for the Secretary-General to start commiting billions of dollars of other peoples money.

It reminds me of “send reinforcements, we going to advance” changing by word of mouth to “send three and fourpence, we’re going to a dance”.

A probability based on a very likely that is probably based on more guessing.

Mike Bromley the Canucklehead says:
November 10, 2012 at 1:29 am
“it is difficult to attribute any single storm to climate change, but the world already knows that extreme weather due to climate change is the new normal.” …Sequele.

Of course I agree with you Mike.
This is the greasy sophistry and weasel words they use today (or maybe always have).
Totally analagous to “I would never say that Blacks are more likely to commit crime but if we let them into our neighbourhood, be sure that house break-ins will increase.”

Luckily he’s preaching to the UN choir, and luckily the UN choir has very little influence these days. The UN has failed so dramatically and bizarrely in so many different ways that nobody obeys its orders any more.

Is very likely that Ban Ki-Moon is putting pressure to secure more countries to sign Kioto II and prepare the world to the more alarmist year ever (2013). It is just a market (carbon, sure) stuff. Now, EUA is the target. Poor Obama. Crash your country and be a servant of north EU and, yet, be a good president. It’s hard. Only a CG III can save him.

What period of time in earth’s history was it free from extreme weather? Sure, there’s never been a time with such a high density of people living all over the planet to experience extreme weather. But when has the planet been free of extreme weather?

So a tropical storm which, in a statistically unlikely event, collided with two other westher systems during a period of spring tides is the reason given for creating new bureaucratic organisations, or at best a lot more overpaid, pointless bureaucrats.

How about “extreme weather due to climate change is the new meme”? That is a statement I can believe in.

What liberty-loving peoples need to do to protect themselves from these statists is to somehow tax only those individuals who are constantly calling on higher taxes for the rest of us to pay – especially on such bankrupt ideas as ‘climate change’. “If you believe in Climate Change/taxpayer-funded abortion/changing the definition of marriage/welfare without work/(etcetera, etcetera…) please turn to the tax tables on page xxx of your Form 1040 instructions to compute your taxes…”

So why do people keep saying that any event of extreme weather is due to climate change – and then claiming that the ‘settled science’ supports this view – when quite clearly it says the opposite?
_____________________________________
First, they want your money/wealth.

Second they want to provide legitimacy for a transition from national sovereignty to something like the EU. Pascal Lamy has stated that repeatedly in his speeches.

…What does the dominant theory tell us? That the international system is founded on the principle of national sovereignty. That the Wesphalian order remains the basis of the international architecture, and that global governance can only result from the action of sovereign States. In other words, that global governance is the globalization of local governance. This theory of governance, which has not substantially changed for centuries, is based on the transitivity of both coherence and legitimacy: as States are coherent and legitimate, global governance is necessarily coherent and legitimate as well.

Unfortunately, the practice tells us otherwise. It does not suffice to establish international organizations to ensure a coherent approach to address the global problems of our time.

First, the European experience shows that supra-national governance can work….

There is one place where attempts to deal with these challenges have been made and where new forms of governance have been tested for the last 60 years: in Europe. The European construction is the most ambitious experiment in supranational governance ever attempted up to now. It is the story of a desired, delineated and organized interdependence between its Member States. How has this endeavour coped with the challenges I have just outlined?….

Translated the world elite want to get rid of national sovereignty. It is a pain in the rump for multinational corporations.

Pascal Lamy goes on to say

….If one looks at governance from a practical point of view, three elements are necessary. First, governance needs to provide leadership, the incarnation of vision, of political energy, of drive. Second, it needs to provide legitimacy, which is essential to ensure ownership over decisions that lead to change. Ownership to prevent the in-built bias towards resistance to modify the status quo. Finally, a legitimate governance system must also ensure efficiency. It must bring about results for the benefit of the people at a reasonable cost…

…In fact, the Wesphalian order is a challenge in itself. The recent crisis has demonstrated it brutally. Local politics has taken the upper hand over addressing global issues. Governments are too busy dealing with domestic issues to dedicate sufficient attention and energy to multilateral negotiations, be they trade negotiations or climate negotiations.

I see four main challenges for global governance today.

The first one is leadership….

The second one is efficiency, i.e. the capacity to mobilize resources, to solve the problems in the international sphere, to bring about concrete and visible results for the benefit of the people. The main challenge here is that the Westphalian order gives a premium to “naysayers” who can block decisions, thereby impeding results. The ensuing viscosity of international decision-making puts into question the efficiency of the international system.

The third one is coherence, for the international system is based on specialization… It is a fact: the UN is not really overarching, assuming this was the initial intention.

The last challenge that I see is that of legitimacy — for legitimacy is intrinsically linked to proximity, to a sense of “togetherness”. By togetherness, I mean the shared feeling of belonging to a community. This feeling, which is generally strong at the local level, tends to weaken significantly as distance to power systems grows. It finds its roots in common myths, a common history, and a collective cultural heritage. It is no surprise that taxation and redistribution policies remain mostly local!

So that is the real reason the UN has promoted CAGW and environmentalism since the first earth summit in 1972, to give legitimacy, a sense of “togetherness” a shared feeling of belonging to a community.

It was always political right from the start. Why else would the major international corporations have put their weight and money behind it for decades? If the power elite and corporations did not want socialism, environmentalism and animal rights to be part of the political landscape, people with those concerns would have been relegated to fringe groups. Instead they have been promote to major political power houses. This did not happen by chance.

The key is to look behind the surface and follow the money trail. To figure out who benefits. never forget H. L. Mencken’s words of wisdom.

i>The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule.

Maurice Strong, who chaired the First Earth Summit in 1972 and the U.N. Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, stated: “We may get to the point where the only way of saving the world will be for industrial civilization to collapse…isn’t it our job to bring that about?”

We see this type of thinking in many. Why are so many people advocating a return to poverty for the majority of humanity (not them of course)?

I think it is because of the basic instinct in most life forms to compete for natural resources and to make sure OUR genes are the ones that survive. That OUR children and great-great grandchildren are the dominant power in the future.

That’s why we can’t have one-world government. When the crazies are in charge, they screw things up for everyone. And that’s another reason why I’d like to see states take back more power from the Feds in the US. It’s much like people running from and to France after Mr. Holland’s election, depending on whether they want to preserve their wealth or take someone else’s.

Give the UN an opening, meaning let them get away with any tax, and they will eventually take control of everything. All nations will lose sovereignty, and we will all devolve to third world poverty. Instead, we should be sharing technology and products made better and cheaper by the private sector. Government doesn’t know how to create real products, but they are good at wasting resources.. They have no useful imagination; they only crave power.

We should be looking at a bright future, but these leaders only have a dark vision ot suffering and trouble. By instilling fear, they hope to scare us into giving them more authority to keep us safe. Instead of saying just “no thanks”, we ought to say “you’re fired”. Yes, US out of UN. Unfortunately, we couldn’t even fire Obama; too many people are scared and dependent on government now – by design.

This just shows how far behind the times the UN actually is! The rest of the world is starting to realise that mankind has been subjected to the biggest con trick ever, but not the UN….
_________________________________
Given the recent US elections, I am afraid you are not correct. However people are starting to wake-up FINALLY. That means the next few years are going to be very very dangerous.

The CAGW story is unraveling, the economic pinch is making more and more people question what the heck politicians are up to and the internet is providing the answer.

Expect a big push to get a Carbon Tax through for ALL countries or a Financial Transaction Tax or a travel tax, anything that will give the UN the ability to tax. Also on the agenda is the UN Gun treaty with universal gun registration:

the UN should “expand the UN Arms register in order to show production and sale of small arms and light weapons. It should include specific names of their producers and traders.”…”to limit and move toward eliminating the use of the veto. The UN must move towards veto restriction. ” … “A major task of the world community in the twenty-first century will be to strengthen and greatly enhance the role of the United Nations in the global context. Governments must recommit themselves to the realization of the goals and mandates of the United Nations Charter… From the 2000: The United Nations Millennium Summit

A discussion of the major objectives of the UN taken from the We The Peoples Millennium Forum Declaration and Agenda for Action that also includes historian Carroll Quigley and his extensive research is here.

I’ve never understood how the concept of global governance could benefit me as an individual. Indeed, I’ve come to a full understanding how the implementation of global governance of the type espoused by the UN will severely limit my individual freedoms and prosperity.

As a consequence, I consider this Ban Ki-moon to be one facinorous, dangerous dude.

… Question– do holders of UN Secretary General’s office now have their brains removed on appointment? Despite real climate scientists stating that Sandy is not a climate change phenomenon Ban Ki Moon insists it is.
_____________________________
No just their honesty and integrity, but that goes for almost all politicians.

provided people find ways to prevent their retirement funds being co-opted by the carbon cowboys, the CAGW scam will never get off the ground…
_______________________
Don’t think that has not been discussed.
MSM report: 401(k) Plan Revamp Eyed By Senate Finance Committee

Democrats in the U.S. House have been conducting hearings on proposals to confiscate workers’ personal retirement accounts — including 401(k)s and IRAs — and convert them to accounts managed by the Social Security Administration….

….Analysts point to another disturbing part of the plan. With a GRA, workers could bequeath only half of their account balances to their heirs, unlike full balances from existing 401(k) and IRA accounts. For workers who die after retiring, they could bequeath just their own contributions plus the interest but minus any benefits received and minus the employer contributions.Another justification for Ghilarducci’s plan is to eliminate investment risk. In her testimony, Ghilarducci said, “humans often lack the foresight, discipline, and investing skills required to sustain a savings plan.” She cited the 2004 HSBC global survey on the Future of Retirement, in which she claimed that “a third of Americans wanted the government to force them to save more for retirement.”

That is enough to make anyone with a 401(k) or IRA do a bunch more research.

It is absolutely critical that the UN chief and others there keep hammering on a dead horse. If they don’t both power and funding disappear. This is a power game. The UN has little an most other aspects of things so they will fight to protect the little they do have be it rational or not. This has and never has had anything to do with reality is has to do with the power theater of demigods.

Democrats have alrerady started the process. They have cut funding for Social Security and Medicare in half. Democrats will insist this “tax cut” continue. This means that the trust funds for SS and Medicare will be depleted. When this occurs Democrats will then have redistributed Social Security and Medicare trust funds to those who have paid little or nothing into the plans.

This is an effective redistribution of trilllions of dollars out of trust funds (yes, I know the money was borrowed by the government) into a general welfare system. With Obama re-elected and no sign of Americans being educated enough to see the handwriting on the wall, Obama’s socialist ideology will be implemented.

The attitude of Democrats was expressed very clearly when Barney Frank “explained” that those who have paid into SS and Medicare do not have this money coming to them; it has been spent already. In a short time these programs will not exist and it seems that many Americans simply listen to the speeches assuring them that Democrats are “saving” these programs while they are, in fact, destroying them.

RockyRoad says:
November 10, 2012 at 6:27 am
I’ve never understood how the concept of global governance could benefit me as an individual. Indeed, I’ve come to a full understanding how the implementation of global governance of the type espoused by the UN will severely limit my individual freedoms and prosperity.

As a consequence, I consider this Ban Ki-moon to be one facinorous, dangerous dude.

It would be nice to be able to say to Ban Ki-moon: “Yes we agree with you about global governance – but no-one currently in the UN or its sub-groups should be allowed to be ‘in any position of power’. As obviously you are all insisting on global governance for the good of humanity and not for any self aggrandizement, you will all be removed from your posts and relinquish all authority, any elevated benefits and savings, and live in your countries of origin at the state provided level of retirement benefits. If you reject this option it is obvious that you are just attempting to gain power and riches for yourselves rather than out of any philanthropy.

United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon says one of the lessons from Superstorm Sandy is the need for global action to deal with future climate shocks.

Due to Sandy, “global action” is to be taken. But spending billions of dollars on things like carbon capture to potentially reduce the global temperature by 1/1000 degree in 100 years is not the global action that is required. Instead, a few million dollars should be spent to make sure the backup generators in the hospitals do not fail should another “Sandy” come next year.

Another reason to get the U.S. out of the UN, and the UN out the U.S. I suggest Port-au-Prince, Haiti as the new UN headquarters location. I’m sure many Americans would gladly help with the move.

Unfortunately, tropical storm Sandy has fueled a boom in “climate change” hysteria. The AGW alarmists don’t have the facts on their side, so they’ve been reduced to blaming every severe weather event or anomaly on human-induced CO2. Their anti-scientific mindset has on been on full display.

Ban Ki-moon back to where he come. When your east coast residents clean up their corrupt and inept local officials, as they recover from the last storm, the UN is just a minor add on to the task. Straight into the east river with em. Actually start there and house the storm victims in the UN Headquarters. This would be the first time US citizens get value for their money from the UN.
And the drop in crimes, of rape, hit&run, and hazardous parking/no-pay would be a net gain to NY citizens. Hard times call for hard answers, there ain’t no such thing as a free lunch.

Kind of ingenious if you ask me. Having failed to solve any actual problems in their entire history, they’ve now turned their attention to problems that don’t exist. This way they can’t fail. At some point in the future they’ll declare global warming to have been defeated and take credit for solving it.

I agree with Ban-ki moon that Sandy is a lesson of climate change. However I don’t agree of the cause and I don’t agree that we can influence the weather.
Looking at the history of hurricane storm surge impacts on the New York City area it becomes apparent that these events are more likely to happen during periods of climate change caused by low solar activity.

Ya’ know it seems to me that every time there’s some weather story in the news that the warmists bullshit conveyor belt gets fired up and dumps a load on anybody who happens to pass by. I wanna know who’s in charge of that conveyor belt. Is it Bankie Moonie, or Al “Gumball” Gore, or that Jewish Muslim Irishman Bar Ach O’Bama?

The damn thing needs to be dismantled, or blown up, or something. I’m real tired of being on the outfeed end of it.

Translation: The public should be scared and let us govern the world so we can redistribute wealth to third world nations in part for colonialism reparations and also so we can use some of this transferred wealth to build up developing nations so that more women get jobs and hence have less kids which will reduce global population.

“One must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore.”
~ Ottmar Edenhofer, Co-Chair, WG-3, UN/IPCC

Degaulle used to call the UN “the thingy”. He was aware the UN (like the IPCC) is a bureaucracy spending much of the time seeking new reasons to justify it’s own existence.
Both tend to impose a global government, in the name of a superior interest of the world, interest citizens are not enlighted enough to understand.

But there is a counter-thesis. A promo for an investment letter posed the following ‘regrettable firm conclusions’:

O is like the Roosevelts, beneficiary of huge oil discoveries and wealth. Like them, he will use these resources to make himself Sugar Daddy to the adoring majority. Who will back him in undoing or bypassing the term limit problem. So he’ll either himself, or using the Putin Patsy Ploy thru a 1 term surrogate, continue to Rule for many more terms, dispensing bread and circuses all the way. (The b/g claim is that there are about 20 onshore tight oil formations, so far, each equivalent to the whole 20bn bbl U.S. reserves previously known. In addition to the Frac Gas fields with associated liquids. )

The wider community is not discussing ‘climate change’ – a planet’s climate is defined by the degree of inclination and all secondary inputs,including temperature variations from unknown causes,do not change a planet’s climate.

The following sequential images of Uranus are of considerable importance for a number of reasons –

Axial precession goes from a long term axial trait to an annual orbital trait as the polar coordinates are carried around in a circle to the central Sun.

The spectrum of planetary or global climate goes from an equatorial climate with zero inclination to a polar climate with 90 degree inclination thereby replacing the older ‘no tilt/no seasons’ ideology which is now unsuitable for 21st century purposes.

An equatorial climate is defined as little or no fluctuations in conditions as a planet orbits the Sun while a planet with an inclination at the polar end of the spectrum experiences huge hemispherical fluctuations such as occurs on the surface of Uranus.

Sadly,the inability to define planetary climate through interpreting images correctly is a symptom of cascading failure or systemic risk as the modeling rut is so deep that few have looked out of the canyon of bandwagon ideologies to breathe the clear and unhurried air of climate studies as they actually exist